NCAA tries again to shrink recruiting rules, such as unlimited communication

The NCAA Division I Board of Directors approved deregulating some rules last January, such as freeing up what coaches send to recruits. Some coaches thought that included Fathead wall stickers. Enough NCAA members opposed some rules changes that they got suspended.

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama -- There is criticism of the NCAA when its most trivial rules are enforced and higher-profile scandals go untouched. And in the highly-regulated world of the NCAA, there is even criticism when those trivial rules get viewed as a lot better once they're gone.

So it is with the NCAA's latest attempt at slimming down its massive rulebook.

Simplifying rules make sense, said SEC Commissioner Mike Slive, "but then when you get down to which ones and the rubber meets the road, it gets complicated. I think sometimes we send mixed messages to the governance of the NCAA by saying, 'We want to do something,' and then we do it and we say, 'Well, we don't want to do that, but we want to do this.'"

Among the rules that got suspended:

* Deregulate who performs recruiting tasks (i.e., the wealthiest schools could hire multiple off-the-field staff members to communicate with players).

* Allow unlimited communication with recruits by phone calls, text messages and social media after July 1 of their sophomore year in high school.

* Lift restrictions on what recruiting materials can be sent to prospects, such as Fathead wall stickers. (Note: The NCAA clarified in March that Fatheads would not be allowed under the rules changes.)

This week, the NCAA board will reconsider the unlimited communication rule. The board's options: Maintain the rule, meaning an override vote of every Division I school; agree with the initial 75-vote override threshold and rescind the proposal; or amend the proposal after further study, which would trigger another 60-day override period.

SEC Executive Associate Commissioner Greg Sankey said he personally believes the concerns should be examined for better solutions.

"Maybe there are some groupings of sports where you can do certain things in a similar way," he said. "Let's just take some time. ... We didn't arrive at the right place for the first swing. That doesn't mean we struck out. It means there's enough concern that we have more work to do."

What's intriguing about the criticism from earlier this year is it didn't fall along the divide between the financial haves and have-nots, such as the cost of attendance debate. This opposition came largely from wealthy conferences and schools.

Although the majority of the SEC supported the deregulation package, Georgia Athletics Director Greg McGarity was outspoken in his concerns it would result in an even greater recruiting arms race.

The Big Ten expressed "serious concerns" for the best interests of high school athletes and an adverse effect on college coaches, administrators and university resources.

Texas football coach Mack Brown said the recruiting deregulation went "a little too far." Added Brown: "Alabama is ahead of all of us with the number of personnel they've hired, and that's something that everybody's looking very closely at." (Auburn followed by hiring some high school coaches for off-the-field staff positions.)

Last summer, the deregulation proposals had "pretty overwhelming support in feedback," Sankey said. "Then as you got to enactment and really looking at what it means, people give different perspectives, which I think is perfectly fine. It's a process, not to borrow somebody else's term (Nick Saban). Getting it fast may not be the best idea as long as you take time to get it right."

That is, unless the next round of NCAA criticism focuses on deregulation taking too long.